The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1887-01-13
More About the Police Judge.

To THE EDITOR OF THE JOURNAL: In answer to
my statement in your columns last week, to the ef-
feet that applied to him for warrant to search a
notorious rumsellers premises, under Sec. 40, Chap
p, Il. s., and he refused to grant it, the Police
Judge of Belfast hurls half column of "legal
lore at me through his organ this week. have
no time desire, and presume you have no space
to allow of a personal discussion on this matter,
but there seem to be a few points 'your honor
makes which require answers.
lst You say have held a Justices commission
for years but have never issued warrant in liquor
cases and none have been returned to me for trial
In answer wish to say received Il Justices com
mission at the time was register Of deeds for the
purpose of being qualified to acknowledge deeds,
conveyances. &c, and not for the purpose of con
ducting criminal business Of any kind, as make
pretensons to sufficient legal requirements for
such duties or position.
2nd. You also say: ale has never issued war
rant in such cases although applications have been
made to him., &c. This Is an error ito not re
call that ever an application was made to me for Il
warrant in liquor case If it had been presume
| should have referred the parties to the Police
Judge, or some trial justice who attended to crimi-
nal business, for the reason above assigned.
3d. You further say "He has never before made
complaint in ii liquor case This is another error
against several rumsellers, under the same statute
as recently, and you refused warrant. These
complaints are on file.
4th. Your assertion that am entitled to be call
Ell a "rairOad man. because of ga transaction with
a crippled Union soldier sat about the time of the
last municipal election, &C., is too vague to admit
of an answer. Please be definite.
9TH. Your proposition to myself with Others
who have made application to you for search
warrants, of your willingness to issue, "if the
statute prevail and you are compelled so to do by
mandamus from the s. j. Court, smicks a little of
''hedgng. We trust your ''lack of confidence"
in the Judges of said Court will not seriously in
terfere with your official action should such man
damus issue
Your reference to card from former sheriff
who was so severely criticised by the temperance
community for ncglecting his sworn duty to
enforce the law in 1882, has decidedly chestnutv
flavor. AS it was evidently not considered Of
sufficient Importance then to answer it can hardly
have improved with age.
But really think you and have no personal
disagreement. ask for a warrant under Scc. 40
of Chap. 27. presume you do not refuse it for
personal reasons but because you claim that section
OF the law is unconstitutional. So all there is of
it is that you are i'm opposition that specific law
to Judge Goddard who included it in the Revised
Statutes: to the Judges of the supreme Court who
have often allowed warrants to hold under it,
and to the legislature which passed it,-thats all.
1t is your quarrel with the law, which you insist on
butting against admire your courage, but it re
calls the answer of Stephenson of England the
inventor of steam rail carriages, who when asked
before committee what would he the result if IL
cow should get on the track in the way of the
train answered "Weel my Lords, it 'ood be bad
for the COO"
There is one thing which myself, i'm common
with all others who have at heart wish to see
rumselling and its attendant evils essened in our
city, most earnestly desire, which is that this
movement towards aiding in enforcing the law
shall not be dragged or forced into, or connected
with, any local quarrel ON railroad or any other
matters. The Executive Com. is composed of
those who hold different individual opinions on
local questions which they claim right to express
Individuals but their united action is solely for
object and they do not thank anyone for attempt
ing to impugn their motives to injure the results
of their labors by false and spurious presumptions
and arguments q. f.. B
Belfast, Jan. 1, 1857,